Mozart

[Luke]

Fair enough Luke, I do feel you are slightly changing your position from what you had originally said, or perhaps I was reading too far into what you were saying & implying, happens .... you're off with the odd assumption about me not being suited to pick up on subtlety merely based on forum activity...but other than that, if you were merely talking about yourself & your own experience - I have no problems with that at all.

Cool. And I'm glad I'm off about the subtlety thing - I hoped I was, and as I said, it's only an impression given by the slant many of your posts take. But belied by posts such as yours on Faure, as I also said...

(Though, I should repeat, I wouldn't in fact have any issue with someone whose tastes tend towards the broader sweep, the more expansive gesture, the more extreme reach, and less towards the small subtle detail or the exquisite semi-hidden touch - takes all sorts, after all. Although it's possible to love both, of course)

[Florestan]

That such a predictible and boring troll managed to stir up a "debate" of a dozen pages is in itself an achievement of Mozartean proportions.

[Gabriel]

Everybody thinks, oh that's just a sonata form, it's just paint by numbers. In reality sonata form was not an established form in Haydn and Mozart's time. They were experimenting with the form, which was only taken as a holy mold after their time, by composers we have forgotten about (except Gurn and GAbriel, of course).

In fact, Herman, if I remember correctly it was Antonín Rejcha who, in the beginning of the nineteenth century (I seem to recall it was in the 1820s) examined the "sonata form" as a whole for the first time. For classical composers of the age of Haydn and Mozart the "formulas" were given by older music (v. gr., Fux's Gradus ad Parnassum): sonata form had more of an adventure than of repetition.

[Herman]

Right.

[Luke]

And of course that's why so many sonata form structures of the 19th century seem formulaic and for-the-sake-of-it (as structures; I'm not talking about the character or quality of the material of the music itself) - because they were constructed around the letter of this sacrosanct 'Mozartian' sonata form which had in reality been determined after-the-fact. Mozart, Haydn, Beethoven and so on composed in the spirit of sonata, not the letter of sonata form (which is why Teresa's talk of the 'laws of musical composition' was misplaced, which is where this point arose, I know).

I'm thinking of someone like Tchaikovsky, at the moment - and I'm thinking this as a Tchaikovsky lover. T adored Mozart above all other composers, idolised him (that little Mozartiana Suite is a gem....) and yet, formally, to me he seems not to have profited from the subtleties of Mozart's writing (and he's not alone in this). Tchaikovsky's formal thunderblows - his recurring fate themes, his slow finales and so on - are big and bold; but on the smaller scale , which is where Mozart's formal genius is displayed, (things such as interactions of phrases and phrases lengths, play with balance and meaning, puns of opening and closing gestures and so on and on) his music is rather less strikingly inflected. That's part of his style, of course - any different and he wouldn't be Tchaikovsky. But it's just an observation....

[Scarpia]

Now that the storm has blown over, I want to mention again a wonderful little piece I've rediscovered, the Divertimento for violin, viola and cello in E-flat K 563.  It is a six movement piece with two minuets and two slow movements (one a theme and variations).  It is definitely an overtly light-weight piece, but Mozart effortlessly invests it with so many beautiful touches, it is a minor gem.

One feature throughout is how effortlessly Mozart makes the harmonic texture seem so rich with only three voices at his disposal.  The first movement, a typical sonata allegro, begins with a charming exposition of themes, but the development leads us back to the opening material with some surprisingly dark harmonies.  The first slow movement is a miracle of delicate gestures, a miniature scene from a tragic opera.  The melodies Mozart gives us in the trios of the two dance movements (three in all) are inspirations of the highest level, particularly those in the second menuet.  Of course the finale is a tight rondo with wonderful melodies in the main theme and episodes and little fugato outbursts.  An example of how a seeming trifle from Mozart can contain little nuggets of pure gold. 

[Gabriel]

Now that the storm has blown over, I want to mention again a wonderful little piece I've rediscovered, the Divertimento for violin, viola and cello in E-flat K 563.  It is a six movement piece with two minuets and two slow movements (one a theme and variations).  It is definitely an overtly light-weight piece, but Mozart effortlessly invests it with so many beautiful touches, it is a minor gem.

One feature throughout is how effortlessly Mozart makes the harmonic texture seem so rich with only three voices at his disposal.  The first movement, a typical sonata allegro, begins with a charming exposition of themes, but the development leads us back to the opening material with some surprisingly dark harmonies.  The first slow movement is a miracle of delicate gestures, a miniature scene from a tragic opera.  The melodies Mozart gives us in the trios of the two dance movements (three in all) are inspirations of the highest level, particularly those in the second menuet.  Of course the finale is a tight rondo with wonderful melodies in the main theme and episodes and little fugato outbursts.  An example of how a seeming trifle from Mozart can contain little nuggets of pure gold.

Beautiful comment. However, I disagree in one point: I think it is a major gem, not a minor gem.

[DavidW]

Beautiful comment. However, I disagree in one point: I think it is a major gem, not a minor gem.

Indeed, it is considered to be one of his greatest chamber works.

[Scarpia]

Beautiful comment. However, I disagree in one point: I think it is a major gem, not a minor gem.

Well, what would be a major gem for some composers might be minor for Mozart. 

I listened to the piece again, and one of the wonderful things about it is how Mozart will suddenly interrupt a simple melody and accompaniment texture with a vigorous fugato, and after much heavy going, will pull up into a charming gallant cadence.   The juxtaposition of contrasting styles can be quite bracing, although in such passages Mozart never allows his counterpoint to sound "academic."   The theme and variations also begins with a very simple melody and texture, but contains a variation of very dense contrapuntal development. 

I've been listening to some of Mozart's adaptions of Bach fugues and it is interesting where he draws his influence.  He was evidently familiar with the organ trio sonatas, as well as the WTC and the Art of the Fugue.

[Luke]

Like 99.9% of his music ...he displays technical formal skill but it's often lean, boring & soft, and never intense.

What's brought on this fresh bout of trolling, James? Feeling bored? Fancying winding a few people up? Provocative and unprompted posts on all three current Mozart threads within minutes of each other - rarely seen a clearer instance of deliberate stirring round these parts!

[Luke]

Yea .. he dabbles but he's nowhere near the Grand Master (Bach) - and of course, the music itself is always light and vivacious in character, a simplification  ... nothing like the great intensity Bach so often achieves.

But then perhaps he wasn't looking for that, though he was certainly capable of it when he chose, as he often did. Could easily put the issue the other way round - 'Bach's music itself is always so heavy, intense and complex - nothing like the lightness and vivacity Mozart so often achieves'.

Of course, neither is true, really, but I suppose there might be a grain of something in them, taken as a huge generalisation. My point is - so what? Why is one 'better' than the other? Why can't music be light and at the same time be wonderful?

[zamyrabyrd]

My favorite example along that vein is La ci darem la mano, from Don Giovanni.  It is an example of Mozart not following the rules, but making his own rules.  It was customary at the time for Arias to be set pieces where characters commented on their feelings, separate from the dramatic action.  Mozart places Zerlina's submission to Don Giovanni's seduction in the middle of the aria.  Don Giovanni's charming solicitations, Zerlina's lamenting of her own weakness, and her ecstasy at having accepted Don Giovanni's offer are all deliciously painted in the music.  A wonderful piece.

For those who have/had trouble with certain composers like Bach or Mozart, vocal music can be the key to open the golden door.
At least, it was so for me. The instrumental music made so much better sense after the discovery of Schubert's Lieder, etc.

ZB

[Scarpia]

Why can't music be light and at the same time be wonderful?

That raises an interesting point.  There seems to be a bias that great art should be tragic, dark, tortured.  It sometimes strikes me that it takes just as great a genius to create something that seems effortless, light and joyful.

[Antoine Marchand]

That raises an interesting point.  There seems to be a bias that great art should be tragic, dark, tortured.  It sometimes strikes me that it takes just as great a genius to create something that seems effortless, light and joyful.

I think it has to do with the nature of happiness and pain.

Happiness doesn't usually need "routes of escape", it is self-sufficient, at some degree "paralyzing". On the other hand, pain and tragedy are just the opposite; you need to transform the pain into something else: music, a novel, a short story, a song, a poem. That the reason why, IMO, "tragic" works are infinitely more numerous than works expressing joyful feelings.

[Luke]

I think it has to do with the nature of happiness and pain.

Happiness doesn't usually need "routes of escape", it is self-sufficient, at some degree "paralyzing". On the other hand, pain and tragedy are just the opposite; you need to transform the pain into something else: music, a novel, a short story, a song, a poem. That the reason why, IMO, "tragic" works are infinitely more than works expressing joyful feelings.

Infinitely more what? - I think you missed out the crucial word in your post! 'interesting'? 'important'? 'appreciated'? 'highly-regarded'? The general point you make is a very interesting one, though.

[DavidW]

I disagree.  People that are happy or joyful feel the need to share it, and it can rub off.  I don't see how pain would be unique in that regard whatsoever.  And tragedies are not necessarily expressions of pain either.

[Herman]

Well, what would be a major gem for some composers might be minor for Mozart. 

I would not call the 563 Divertimento a light piece, nor a minor gem.

It is major Mozart, even though it was not intended for public performance, and it is one of those utterly shattering pieces that seem to come out of nowhere. Its mix of the grotesque and comic with the tragic intensity makes it one of the greatest pieces of Mozart's chamber music.

[Josquin des Prez]

Like 99.9% of his music ...he displays technical formal skill but it's often lean, boring & soft, and never intense.

Mozart music is neither lean, nor boring and soft, and most definitely intense. Very much so.

[Franco]

There is a saying in the theater: "Tears are easy; comedy is hard."

[Antoine Marchand]

Infinitely more what? - I think you missed out the crucial word in your post! 'interesting'? 'important'? 'appreciated'? 'highly-regarded'?

"Numerous". I was just thinking in terms of numbers, quantitatively.